Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Ewin


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Michig (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Matt Ewin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NMMA JadeSnake (talk) 07:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strikeout added because JadeSnake was a confirmed sockpuppet of an already banned user.Willdawg111 (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete — Fails WP:NMMA and seems to fail WP:GNG.  Poison  Whiskey  14:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:NMMA with no fights for a top tier organization. Jakejr (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Has refs from the BBC and Sports Illustrated, as well as good quality refs here, here, here, and Especially here. Turns out he is a notorious criminal as well as a World Champion. He also would seem to be more notable in the UK, as well as this one, and this government article, and another about the ongoing criminal case I'll add these to the body of the article tommorow if they arent already there PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 09:47, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * MMAUniverse link is a dupicate of the "This is Glouchestershire" link (submitted by a user). Crown Protection Service link only mentions Ewin in 1 line in passing. Hasteur (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - The above sources are not strong enough to support {[WP:GNG]], as they only nibble around the edges of the subject (passing mentions or duplicates of each other) and do not qualify as real sourcing. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 03:56, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep On the bases of the nominator being proven to be a sock. Because of this consensus may be inaccurate and may lead to wrong course of action, if another user wants to nominate this page for deletion they may do so, but not under the current circumstances. I would also like to state that I will also vote to keep on the basis of WP:GNG, this person clearly passes as he has become somewhat infamous in this country and has had some strong articles on him as stated by PortlandOregon97217. Pound4Pound (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC) Pound4Pound blocked as a sock of the blocked BigzMMA   ✍   Mtking  ✉ 06:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Speedy keep is only applicable if it's a procedural fault in the nomination. JadeSnake is not a sock of a banned user, but a sock of an indefinitely blocked user. Even if the nominator was banned, the justification is quite clear. Hasteur (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Either this BLP is presented and judged on MMA grounds (which the article is supporting) or on WP:CRIMINAL (which the article does not support). Either way the nomination reason "Does not meet SNG WP:NMMA" is valid and based on the fact that the subject is incarcertaed and now awating conviction for annother drug offense seems unlikely that he will ever clear the WP:NMMA bar.  Drug dealing escapades do not seem to clear the dual test for WP:CRIMINAL so still seeing this as a delete. Hasteur (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Question- Does he not pass WP:GNG with all of the WP:SOURCES presented? I think he does by a fair margin PortlandOregon97217 (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No. The sources are weak in the extreme. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 03:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails both WP:NMMA and WP:GNG. Mdtemp (talk) 17:16, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.